C-81/88

OPINION OF MR JACOBS —CASE C-81/88

30 October 1974 in Case 188/73 Grassiv 4. Reasons for promotion decisions are not Council [1974] ECR 1099). required to be given either to the officials promoted, whom they cannot adversely affect, nor to candidates not promoted, who might be harmed by such a 3. The comparative examination of the statement of reasons (see the judgment merits of candidates for A 3 posts, may, of 16 December 1987 in Case 111/86 in view of their nature and importance, Delauche v Commission [1987] ECR be properly conducted without taking 5345). account of the area of activities in which the duties connected with those posts 5. In accordance with consistent case-law, must be performed and by taking into the appointing authority has a wide consideration solely the specific qualities power of appraisal as regards the of the candidates and in particular their comparative examination of the ability to direct a large administrative respective merits of officials who are unit, where the vacancy notices for the eligible for promotion and the Court post do not require the candidates to must limit its review to the question have specific qualifications in the area of whether the appointing authority has activities covered by the provisions used its power in a manifestly erroneous concerned. manner.

OPINION OF T H E ADVOCATE GENERAL

M r Advocate General Jacobs delivered his Opinion o n 27 J u n e 1989. * H e concluded that the Court should:

(1) dismiss the application;

(2) o r d e r the Economic and Social Committee to pay the costs.